The Logic Lifeline

A logical approach to sorting out world events. Where logic, opinion and speculation are combined to produce a reasoned, but entertaining reading experience. The unofficial hometown conservative blog of Woodridge, Il

Wednesday, May 31, 2006

AP giddy from Haditha uses the Kill word

The media is starting to feel the giddy affects from the Haditha story. They haven't felt this good since Abu Graibh. So today when AP needs to report on a shooting in Iraq due to a car not stopping at a clearly marked prohibited area near an observation post, they could not resist adding the word "Kill" to the title of the story. The unfortunate incident is shown to be without malice in one paragraph of the story:
The U.S. military said coalition troops fired at a car after it entered a clearly marked prohibited area near an observation post but failed to stop despite repeated visual and auditory warnings.
Of course this paragraph is couched in the wording that "The U.S. military said". So what else is in the story to show their overindulgence of "Haditha wine"? In this unfortunate incident there were two women that died. Yet the title of the story only mentions one of the women. Now why is that? Well, one of the women was pregnant. So in addition to the "kill" word, the title focuses on the pregnant woman to pack the most punch. The title U.S. Troops Kill Pregnant Woman in Iraq not only provides a sucker punch to our armed forces without correct context, it casts aside the other woman that also died like yesterday's laundry.

What else in the story shows the media's inebriation on Haditha? Well, this was a story about two women dying because the car they were in went into a prohibited zone and did not stop when warned. Yet, the bulk of writing in the story is about Haditha. The name Haditha is mentioned 4 times. There are 23 paragraphs in the article yet only 8 are devoted to the title subject, with 15 paragraphs devoted to Haditha. Likewise there are 822 words in the article. Only 273 words are devoted to the title subject and 549 words devoted to Haditha.

I would say more, but the disgusting glee that this media exhibits when it attacks our military speaks for itself.

Political Test - Surprise, I am a Republican

Hat tip to Merete:

You are a

Social Conservative
(36% permissive)

and an...

Economic Conservative
(75% permissive)

You are best described as a:


Link: The Politics Test on OkCupid Free Online Dating
Also: The OkCupid Dating Persona Test

Monday, May 29, 2006

Murtha spanked by fellow Marines who want to give their fellows the benefit of the doubt

There are several stories this weekend that really cut to the bone against John Murtha's recent disloyalty against members of the US Marine. Murtha wore the Marine uniform and served his country. For that I honor him. For his leap to believe allegations against Marines for purposefully killing innocent Iraqi civilians in Haditha before the evidence is clearly in, I could not have more disdain.

The first article from Reuters shows the approach to the allegations as they should be handled. The man handing Murtha an example on a platter is the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine General Peter Pace. Apparantly, this accusation of events from last November only reached the Pentagon on Feb 10 this year. Pace spent a fair amount of time explaining that they do not know why there was such a delay and that both the delay and accusations are under investigation. Pace honors the US Marines by pronouncing they are waiting until the investigation is complete to cast judgement AND to point out how honorable the service of the Marines in Iraq has been:

"I don't suspect anything," Pace said. "I want to wait for the investigation. We will find out what happened and we will make it public, but to speculate right now wouldn't do anyone any good."

Pace, the first Marine to serve as chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said "99.9 percent" of US soldiers in Iraq were conducting themselves with honor and courage.

Now that is a class act and an honor to those who have put their life on the line. Murtha seems to think that his former Marine service is a free ticket to dishonor the Corp. with unproven accusations from incomplete investigations.

The next Marine to step up to the plate is Sen. John Warner, a former Marine and the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Here is the NewsMax coverage of John Warner's take on the situation:

Asked about Murtha's claim that Marines executed residents of the village of Haditha "in cold blood," Sen. Warner told ABC's "This Week":

"At this time, particularly on Memorial Day . . . I think we should be calm and reassuring to the American people that the men and women of our armed forces are admirably and professionally conducting their heavy responsibilities."

The top Republican said: "I respect my friend, John Murtha. I also was privileged to wear the Marine uniform. But we've got to let the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the investigation system, proceed before we reach any conclusions on this matter."

Finally, a third Marine brings his own experiences of accusation to the table. The Washington Post brings us the exact words of U.S. Marine Illario Pantano, who was actually falsely charged with dishonorable actions on the battle field. In his piece Mr. Murtha's Rush to Judgement the entire piece is packed with a powerful perspective, so here are his words in their entirety:

A year ago I was charged with two counts of premeditated murder and with other war crimes related to my service in Iraq. My wife and mother sat in a Camp Lejeune courtroom for five days while prosecutors painted me as a monster; then autopsy evidence blew their case out of the water, and the Marine Corps dropped all charges against me ["Marine Officer Cleared in Killing of Two Iraqis," news story, May 27, 2005].

So I know something about rushing to judgment, which is why I am so disturbed by the remarks of Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) regarding the Haditha incident ["Death Toll Rises in Haditha Attack, GOP Leader Says," news story, May 20]. Mr. Murtha said, "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."

In the United States, we have a civil and military court system that relies on an investigatory and judicial process to make determinations based on evidence. The system is not served by such grand pronouncements of horror and guilt without the accuser even having read the investigative report.

Mr. Murtha's position is particularly suspect when he is quoted by news services as saying that the strain of deployment "has caused them [the Marines] to crack in situations like this." Not only is he certain of the Marines' guilt but he claims to know the cause, which he conveniently attributes to a policy he opposes.

Members of the U.S. military serving in Iraq need more than Mr. Murtha's pseudo-sympathy. They need leaders to stand with them even in the hardest of times. Let the courts decide if these Marines are guilty. They haven't even been charged with a crime yet, so it is premature to presume their guilt -- unless that presumption is tied to a political motive.

We have heard ad nauseum of Murtha's Marine service and this somehow disqualifies us from criticizing his irresponsible actions. I have presented the words of 3 Marines who have both served honorably and continue to honor their fellow Marines with the benefit of the doubt until the facts are in. I have repeatedly stated, this is not about whether the events of the accusations took place. If they are proven to have happened, the participants will and should be punished. The main point is that until that verdict is reached, a loyal American will back up our soldiers. If the charges end up being bogus as in Illario Pantano's case, these Marines should know that we stood behind them the whole time.

Of course if some are willing to spit on the service of the Marine Corp. as a whole to score cheap political points, then new lows have truly been sunk to. On this Memorial Day, the Logic Lifeline stands behind our soldiers.

Friday, May 26, 2006

Bread slice sandwiches in an outrageous amendment

Sen. Chris "Bread Slice" Dodd has sandwiched in an amendment to the immigration bill requiring the US to consult with Mexico before building a fence. Here is the amendment:
(b) CONSULTATION REQUIREMENT.--Consultations between United States and Mexican authorities at the federal, state, and local levels concerning the construction of additional fencing and related border security structures along the United States-Mexico border shall be undertaken prior to commencing any new construction, in order to solicit the views of affected communities, lessen tensions and foster greater understanding and stronger cooperation on this and other important issues of mutual concern.
At worst this amendment sabotages the construction of the fence. At best this solicitation of views will no doubt go on endlessly making the actual construction unlikely in our lifetime. This amendment was in a managers package submitted by Arlen Specter. So we can thank Bread Slice and the Mother of All RINOs for this farce. We can also thank the following GOP Senators for aiding and abetting:

Republicans who voted for the Mexican consultation requirement:

Bennett, Bond, Brownback, Chafee, Coleman, Collins, Craig, Graham, Hagel, Lugar, Collins, McCain, Specter, Stevens, Warner, Martinez, Murkowski, Snowe and Voinovich

We can also note one Democrat that stood up for his country and voted against it: Lincoln.

Hat tip to Lou Dobbs for breaking this and Michelle Malkin for posting on it.

Sowell - Amnesty would give illegals more rights than citizens

Thomas Sowell has a brilliant piece entitled Bordering on Fraud, Part III. I'm sure the first two were also brilliant but I did not read them. The basic underlying point Sowell makes is that under amnesty and current law, the illegal immigrant obtains more rights than the average citizen. Here are some of his points:

Minority Status

Since most of the illegals are Mexican, that makes them a minority. Under affirmative action, combined with amnesty, they would have preferences in jobs and other benefits.

Those who set up their own businesses would be entitled to preferences in getting government contracts. Their children would be able to get into college ahead of the children of American citizens with better academic qualifications.

We could stop here with the point solidly made, but let's go on.
Cheaper Tuition
Illegals who graduate from a high school in California can already attend the
University of California, paying lower tuition that an American citizen from neighboring Oregon.
Back Taxes
Under the supposedly "tough" immigration bill in the U.S. Senate, illegals don't have to pay all the back taxes they owe. An American citizen gets no such break from the government and can end up in federal prison, like Al Capone.
Outstanding Warrants

If an American citizen gets stopped by the police for a traffic violation and the cops discover that he is wanted for some other violation of the law, they can arrest him for whatever else he has done.

But if an illegal alien gets stopped for going through a red light and the police discovers that he is in the country illegally, in many communities the cop is forbidden to arrest him for that -- or even to report him to the feds.

Identity Theft

If an American citizen gets stopped by the police for a traffic violation and the cops discover that he is wanted for some other violation of the law, they can arrest him for whatever else he has done.

But if an illegal alien gets stopped for going through a red light and the police discovers that he is in the country illegally, in many communities the cop is forbidden to arrest him for that -- or even to report him to the feds.

Citizen, go to the back seat of the bus and make sure you give up your seat if an illegal immigrant needs it.

Murtha makes some sane statements

While Murtha still sticks to his pre-judgement of the marines at Haditha, during his appearance on Hannity and Colmes he seems to have had at least some partially lucid moments. He at least places the war in Iraq in the same context of WWII according to a NewsMax summary of the conversation:

Asked how the U.S. military could possibly be engaged in "purposely, indiscriminately killing innocent civilians," Murtha invoked U.S. air raids on Hitler's Germany and Tojo's Japan.

"In World War II we dropped bombs on all these different countries," he told Colmes. "We killed civilians. In wartime – this is wartime. You're not sitting in an office back here. This is wartime."

So basically if Murtha puts this into the category of other wars like WWII, it takes away the ridiculous notion that Iraq presents unique issues that drive soldiers to do these things on the battlefield. In all wars we have pockets of soldiers that for whatever reason choose to do these despicable things. I would point out that soldiers from all countries do them. The question becomes what is condoned by the country these soldiers represent and what is dealt with and how. The answer to that is what reflects on the nation and command, not the actions themselves. I am quite sure that the presidents of WWII, Vietnam and now Iraq did not authorize or encourage any such acts taken. When liberals attempt to proclaim that Bush encourages or authorizes these actions or even the actions at Abu Graibh, it is politics pure and simple.

Murtha speaks in the same interview on the subject of impeachment. Read carefully:

Separately, Murtha said that some of his fellow Democrats were wrong to press for President Bush's impeachment.

"I don't think what he did was impeachable," he told Colmes.

"I think what he did was a misjudgment, a mischaracterization, a misrepresentation" of intelligence leading up to the Iraq war, the Pennsylvania Democrat explained. But certainly, at this stage, I couldn't say that it's impeachable."

A few things here. First, it is interesting that Murtha seems to be giving Bush more a benefit of the doubt as those marines at Haditha. Anyway, here is where we will see if Murtha is straight up or playing politics. Now that these statements are on record, any future pursuit of impeachment on his part will reveal Murtha's true colors. The fact is there is a lot to be known about Bush's actions leading up to war. I would doubt that investigation would reveal much more than is already known. So from what Murtha now knows, he claims here that Bush's actions are not impeachable. I think Murtha has really stepped in it here. If he is straight up, he just ticked off the hoards of the fringe left that have been worshipping at his feet for months now. If he later gets aggressive about impeachment, then he would reveal himself to all as a politician playing games this whole time.

Thursday, May 25, 2006

It just does not get any clearer than this

For those who don't visit often, Mary Katherine Ham co-posts quite frequently. Today, she posted on a Dow Jones Newswire article that shows good economic news after good economic news. I don't usually do this, but to get the full flavor of all the good economic news here is a copy of the story with bold emphasis added by Ms. Ham to drive the point home:
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--The U.S. economy opened the year with more vitality than first thought, driven by stronger inventory building and overseas sales.

Gross domestic product increased at a 5.3% annual rate January through March, the Commerce Department said Thursday in its first revision to first-quarter 2006 GDP. The government initially estimated growth at 4.8%.

Price inflation estimates were left largely untouched.

The report showed corporate profits after taxes climbed 8.8% to $1.155 trillion January through March from the last three months of 2005. Profits increased 13.8% in the fourth quarter. Year over year, profits climbed 24.8% since the first quarter of 2005.

Raised projections on inventory building and exports were behind the upward revision to GDP, which is a measure of all goods and services produced in the economy.

The 5.3% seasonally adjusted gain in GDP was much bigger than the fourth quarter's 1.7% push forward, and marked the strongest quarterly showing since third-quarter 2003, when GDP raced ahead at a pace of 7.2%.

Still, Wall Street expected faster growth of first-quarter GDP; the median estimate of 23 economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires and CNBC was a 5.8% increase.

The revisions released Thursday showed business inventory building was stronger than first assumed. Stockpiles rose by $32.3 billion; originally, Commerce estimated a $21.9 billion increase. Companies had elevated stocks $37.9 billion in the fourth quarter.

The accumulation of goods subtracted only 0.14 percentage points from first-quarter GDP. Originally, Commerce said inventories cut 0.52 percentage points off GDP.

Businesses increased spending a little less than previously thought. Outlays rose 13.1% January through March, lower than the originally estimated 14.3% advance. Business spending rose 4.5% in the fourth quarter. First-quarter investment in structures climbed 11.3% and equipment and software increased 13.8%.

First-quarter spending by consumers rose 5.2%, down from a previously reported 5.5% but way above the fourth quarter's 0.9% advance.

Consumer spending accounts for the lion's share of economic activity - about two-thirds. It contributed 3.63 percentage points to GDP in the first quarter; the original estimate was a contribution of 3.81 percentage points.

Purchases of durable goods surged 20.5% in January through March, a bit down from a previously reported 20.6% but far stronger than October-through-December's 16.6% tumble.

Durable goods are expensive items designed to last at least three years, such as cars.

First-quarter non-durables spending rose by 5.7%. Services spending went 2.2% higher.

Trade exerted less of a drag on GDP, according to the revised data. U.S. exports rose by 14.7%. Imports increased 12.8%. Originally, exports were seen up 12.1% and imports 13.0% higher. Fourth-quarter exports increased by 5.1% and imports surged 12.1%. Trade lopped 0.55 percentage points off GDP in the first quarter; initially, Commerce said trade reduced GDP by 0.84 percentage points.

Residential fixed investment, which includes spending on housing, climbed by 3.1% in the first quarter, higher than the originally estimated 2.6% rate of growth. Fourth-quarter spending went up 2.8%.

Real final sales of domestic product, which is GDP less the change in private inventories, climbed 5.5%. The original estimate was a 5.4% increase. Fourth-quarter sales fell 0.2%.

Federal government spending increased by 10.5%, revised down from an initially estimated 10.8% increase. Fourth-quarter spending fell 2.6%. State and local government outlays increased 0.8%.

The government's price index for personal consumption rose 2.0%, unchanged from the previous estimate for the quarter and below the fourth quarter's 2.9% climb. The PCE price gauge excluding food and energy increased 2.0%, the same as the previous estimate for the quarter and below the fourth quarter's 2.4% climb.

The price index for gross domestic purchases, which measures prices paid by U.S. residents, rose 2.8%, up from the previous estimate for the quarter of 2.7% but below the fourth quarter's 3.7% climb. The chain-weighted GDP price index rose 3.3%, the same as the previous estimate for the quarter but below the fourth quarter's 3.5% climb.

Ms. Ham quips at the end that the author 'had to whip out a thesaurus to figure out more ways to say "increased." '

Ok, so all of this amazing news and what is the point besides where is the MSM on all of this news? The point to her post is the headline chosen for this piece:
US 1Q GDP Revised At Rate Below Expectations
You might need to get out your manifying glass to find the following which is the inspiration behind the underwhelming title:
Still, Wall Street expected faster growth of first-quarter GDP; the median estimate of 23 economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires and CNBC was a 5.8% increase.
We have seen the MSM dodging and ducking great economic news. We have seen the MSM continue to scrounge for bad news whenever they have to report good news. We have seen Greenspan and Buffet taking every chance to try to sink the housing market. And of course we have seen the MSM try every trick to spin good economic news into bad. This one, however, really takes the cake.

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Tim Cavanaugh wants free flow of people in North America

Mark has requested my comments on an article in the LA Times by Tim Cavenaugh. He thinks that the immigration problem can be resolved by:
But here's one good idea you won't hear about. Let's allow the North American Free Trade Agreement to live up to its promise and permit citizens of Canada, the United States and Mexico to move and work freely among the three countries.
I don't know if this was ever a vision of NAFTA as he implies or if he wants to take NAFTA one step further. Cavenaugh dismisses other solutions like mass deportation, guest worker programs and the wall as "doozies". Two claims are made that seem to defy the senses when reading them:
1) "A policy of borders without visas would in fact be more restrictive and formal..."
2) " Free movement would be more secure than our current system..."

He also attempts to debunk common sense by addressing the two objections to open borders:
There are two objections to an open border policy: national security and economics. One is specious; the other is based on ignorance of the way free markets work and free people behave.
In a final bid, he even goes for the holy grail by referencing the Gipper:
In a 1979 speech, President Reagan proposed open travel throughout North America.
While it is true that opening the border would require identification, this would only apply at checkpoints. If we have laxity at the border today, imagine the laxness from the standpoint of dropping prevention of the flow of people. One might think that the example of Western Europe might hold here, where travel is very free between countries. In this case the overriding point is that we have a huge descrepancy of wealth between the US and Mexico (and even Canada). There would be huge chaos as there would be a flood from both the south and the north. If we have millions trying to come with some level of resistance, imagine the flood with no resistance.

The bottom line is that Cavanaugh is nuts.

Bread slice of waitress sandwich running for Prez

Though I kept looking for the punch line, apparantly it is not a joke: Sen. Christopher Dodd is planning to run for President in '08. Dodd is possibly most famous for partnering with Ted Kennedy in a restaurant when both were wildly drunk to make a "waitress sandwich". They grabbed a waitress and sandwiched her between them making quite a spectacle. Ah, these champions of women must have an outlet sometime I suppose. A word of advice to Dodd: don't bother.

Logic Lifeline New Orleans Flashback

Click here for an interesting flashback post from Jan 31 on the potential Mayoral race between Nagin and Landrieu. My last paragraph talks about rough waters ahead in Louisiana for the Democrat machine that has entrenched itself:
Perhaps this is not simply a Landrieu power play, after all. With Governor Blanco and Nagin in the hot seat, thousands of normally Democrat voters displaced to other states and Mary acting somewhat irrationally lately, the whole Louisiana Democrat machine could be in danger of an overthrow. Mitch's run in New Orleans could simply be a bid to shore up the Democrat position before future rough waters when Blanco runs for re-election.
The recent bribery scandal surrounding William Jefferson mixed with Landrieu losing to Nagin should make Louisiana politics very interesting in the next months and years. We saw the overthrow of the Democrat machine in neighboring Georgia a few years ago. I think the LA. Dems should be quaking in their boots about now.

Sunday, May 21, 2006

Murtha becoming a loathsome individual

Even some of John Murtha's supporters will certainly get a retching feeling in their stomach to hear him assume the guilt of US Marines prior to a completed investigation and without even reading the initial report. There is a report that some Marines entered civilian houses in Iraq and purposefully opened fire on the innocent inhabitants. The commanders have been relieved of command until the investigation is complete.

While most loyal Americans would give their soldiers the benefit of the doubt until the investigation is complete, John Murtha was willing to assume their guilt on national television. According to a partial transcript posted on from
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Let me ask you Mr. Murtha to give us some details about that. Draw us a picture of what happened at Haditha.

REP. JOHN “JACK” MURTHA: Well, I’ll tell you exactly what happened. One Marine was killed and the Marines just said we’re going to take care – we don’t know who the enemy is, the pressure was too much on them, so they went into houses and they actually killed civilians. And, and –

MATTHEWS:—was this My Lai? Was this a case of – when you say cold blood Congressman, a lot of people think you’re basically saying you got some civilians sitting in a room around a field and they’re executed.

MURTHA: That’s exactly it.

Even if these marines are found guilty, such disloyalty to such a historically honorable group as the US Marine Corp (who Murtha once was part of) prior to actually knowing is absolutely disgusting. It shows a reluctance on the part of Murtha to stand by his country and those who put their life on the line. It shows a willingness to leap at any opportunity to be critical of our armed forces. I have seen no denouncement by members of his party, so we can assume they are in agreement until such denouncement surfaces.

A Driving Analogy

Another item regarding the immigration topic that burns me is this completely deceptive ploy by the media trying to blend illegal immigration and immigration. When we call for enforcement of the border, we are told by liberals that we are a nation of immigrants so why are we now being anti-immigrant? Please.

A clear analogy would be if I were to decry the crime of drunk driving. I could talk about the danger, the deaths and costs every year that is caused by drunk driving. So my criticism would be of drunk drivers. The analogous response by liberals would be to tell me how critical I am because we are a nation of drivers. In fact we need driving to keep our economy going. I should be embracing all drivers. I think this analogy drives home the point that just as there is a critical difference between drivers and drunk drivers, there is a critical difference between immigrants and illegal immigrants.

The will of the people trampled on

While time has failed me this week to comment on the immigration developments, now that I have a few moments words seem to fail me. Mere words cannot express how both political parties in this country have stabbed the people in the back concerning illegal immigration. I usually provide links for things, but nothing I say should be in dispute, so I will spend my time discussing it instead of chasing down the stories I read this week.

First, we had President Bush's speech. I did not see it or read it, so I am going off of post-commentary. Basically, I think it could be boiled down to - we are both a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. To willingly participate in the media mixing immigration and illegal immigration is a poke in the eye for me. These are separate issues and the media's campaign to blend to two to muddy the waters of debate should be criticized, not joined. If the words of the speech were not enough to show that Bush is not really serious about completely fixing this issue, subsequent interviews with those in his administration reveal it with clarity. An interview between Hugh Hewitt and Julie Meyers (Deputy Director of Homeland Security or something like that) showed a clear abhorrence of building physical barriers.

Later in the week there was some discussion and even voting about putting up some fencing. I think the border is over 2000 miles and in rough numbers the house voted for 700 miles and the senate voted for 300+ miles. Somebody said later we were not building a fence but a funnel (I think Boortz). Look, some is better than none. Yes it will result in illegals going to the open areas where we can beef up with people. This is good. The problem is that in times past there has been some buzz about fixing the problem. This bone would have been appropriate then. Today there is a huge near revolt over fixing the problem and the solution should have fully stepped up to the plate.

Also, Bush committed to adding National Guardsmen to the patroling of the border. At first this seemed great, but the more it was criticized by the liberals the more the responses were timid instead of bold. It is only temporary. I even heard they will not be armed. They will not actually make arrests, but monitor and call in the border patrol.

Then Mexico began threatening lawsuits if we dared enforce our border. This is enough to blow my stack. At that time, Bush should have made a very bold statement to Vincente Fox. "You will not tell us how to enforce our laws. You will also stop being hypocritical as you work to enforce your immigration policies yet demand us to ignore ours." If there was any response it did not register on my radar.

While I am completely disgusted that Bush and the GOP are willing to thumb their nose at those who put them in office and throw away their majority to keep the free flow of illegals coming in, I would point out that the Democrats have not stepped up to the plate on this issue either. I posted months ago that they could take the majority back on this issue alone. While they have words of criticism to the GOP for not fixing the problem, they make it very clear they have no desire to seal the border. In fact they have their "race cards" in hand and ready to play if the GOP ever did get serious about this issue. No, both parties have either failed to listen to the will of the people OR they have purposefully turned a deaf ear and insist on trampling the will of the people.

Sure sign of freedom in Cuba

Many Hollywood celebrities and liberal college elites can't say enough good things about Fidel Castro. This lovefest that permeates the liberal pop culture in America is enough to both boggle the mind and trigger a gag reflex. Such is their hatred of the American capitalistic system that has made many of them millions, they are willing to praise a tyrranical dictator with blood on his hands.

How can these elites look at the recent news story of Castro's doctor and continue to embrace such a fiend? The doctor has given a full exam of Fidel and come out declaring he will live to 140!! Why this doctor should be made the poster boy of the freedom of expression for Cuba. Where a handful among billions today may reach just below 120, this doctor defies reason and boasts of 20 years more. Can anyone give an explanation other than fear that would cause this doctor to voluntarily choose to become an international laughing-stock? It must make folks like Oliver Stone proud to have given such praise to Fidel to see this poor doctor cowering in fear that any statement regarding Castro's health could be his last. Don't look now liberals, laughing-stock syndrome is contagious.

Friday, May 19, 2006

Warning: Great Pressure and No outlet

I hope at least a few people have missed my posting this week. I have been crazy busy on some deadlines. I am meeting today to present a proposal for a multi-million dollar project I am hoping gets approved. This is only the first tollgate, but if it passes here the rest should be a formality.

I have been following the news this week and am just livid at several items across party lines and with various issues. With this great pressure and having no outlet this week I am ready to blow. I hope to have time this weekend to do some rapid fire. I hope nobody minds if I go back a few days in news cycles.

Monday, May 15, 2006

Arnold the incredible changing animal

We keep hearing statements from Arnold every couple of weeks that are so absurdly obvious pandering to the fruits and nuts crowd in Cal-eee-fornia. True conservatives all pushed to vote in McClintock against Arnold. Others claimed that conservatives should vote for Arnold because he was the only GOP who could win. I will give Arnold a few points for trying to do a few conservative things in the state. He tried hard with his ballot initiatives and was soundly defeated. So Arnold has been changing animals with each passing year. He started out an elephant (GOP). It then became obvious he was a RINO (Republican in name only). Now he has become a Panda (panderer). Of course, as his pandering becomes so obscenely ridiculous he is looking more and more like a Jackass.

He started out with a bold announcement that global warming is man-made. He then announced he was going to get rid of his Hummer. There have been a few ridiculous statements in recent weeks I can't remember but I vividly remember the "gag me" response I had. Now he comes out with a statement against using the National Guard for enforcing the border. So please tell us Arnold what the solution is? He has no solution, yet he opens his mouth. Classic Jackass.

The question is has Arnold sold enough of his soul, his reputation and his credibility to cause the fruits and nuts of California to vote him back in? Time will tell whether he will show himself enoough of a jackass for them to vote for him instead of the Democrat jackass.

Thursday, May 11, 2006

Lou Dobbs Shows CNN the Way

I have posted several times on the incredible sinking ratings at CNN as they continue to provide around the clock doses of liberal laced news. So what can CNN do? Lou Dobbs is blazing a clear path for what CNN needs to do.

Lou Dobbs has been mercilessly hammering the illegal immigration issue. His message is ringing loud and clear with viewers. According to NewsMax:

"Lou Dobbs Tonight” averaged 817,000 total viewers last month - a 46 percent increase over April of last year, according to Nielsen Media Research. So far in 2006, Dobbs is up 33 percent.

"The passions of the country have aligned with Lou's passions for subjects like broken borders," CNN/U.S. president Jonathan Klein told the Philadelphia Inquirer."The rest of the nation is awakening."

Dobbs message is clear, consistent and conservative and the nation responds. CNN should pay attention or they will continue to trail behind Fox in a distant 2nd.

Wednesday, May 10, 2006

Stop wasting time with symbolism

Along with the immigration debate there has been a lot of dialogue about singing the national anthem in another language. While I would oppose the use of this in an official function, there are many forums I would have no problem. If the Hispanic Caucus had a dinner and began singing this in Spanish, I think that would be very appropriate. My point is that we spent 8 long years under Bill Clinton's Administration that paid a lot of attention to symbolism instead of substance. It is too much of a reminder when I hear people of my political persuasion doing the same thing. It also wastes valuable time to discuss the real issues.

Drop the word mastermind - it is going to their head

CNN is reporting on the killing of the bombing "mastermind" guilty of the recent bombings in Egypt. I am getting very tired of the continued use of this word "mastermind". This word is too lofty for such a primitive mindset. I think a better word might be bomb "monkey". We could train a monkey to do this work of constructing bombs. Why elevate these people to a position of assumed intelligence? A global use of a word of derision is more likely to discourage this type of behavior than a word of admiration.

Tuesday, May 09, 2006

The Danger of Populism: Jona Goldberg

Jonah Goldberg has written an interesting piece on the dangers of populism: a good article with a less than appealing name. Something that has struck me lately is the pointing to opinion polls and to world opinion as support for the rightness or wrongness of a political point. While polls may be used to predict the outcome of elections or to apply pressure on politicians, to point to a populist view to support a political view is ludicrous. We have seen many times through history where the populace is completely wrong. If taking a poll the participants were asked to defend their responses using facts and reason, my guess is that 85% would not know where to begin. At best they would spew slogan quips like "Bush lied, people died."

The opening paragraph of Goldberg's piece is a work of art:
Politics has a math of its own. Whereas a scientifically minded person might see things this way: One person who says 2+2=5 is an idiot; two people who think 2+2=5 are two idiots; and a million people who think 2+2=5 are a whole lot of idiots—political math works differently. Let’s work backwards: if a million people think 2+2=5, then they are not a million idiots, but a “constituency.” If they are growing in number, they are also a “movement.” And, if you were not only the first person to proclaim 2+2=5, but you were the first to persuade others, then you, my friend, are not an idiot, but a visionary.
What must be understood is that it is critical to convince the masses, but it is equally important to understand that just because the masses are convinced of something does not mean they are correct. It could simply mean that a propoganda initiative was successful. Adolf Hitler was an evil and disgusting human being, but he knew something about propoganda. Here are some quotes from Mein Kampf compiled by the website Adolf Hitler: Perverse Political Genius:
"The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of the nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies but would be ashamed to tell a big one."

"All propaganda must be so popular and on such an intellectual level, that even the most stupid of those towards whom it is directed will understand it. Therefore, the intellectual level of the propaganda must be lower the larger the number of people who are to be influenced by it."

"Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise."
Those three selections should be read and re-read a few times to let them sink in. Then think of today's political climate and read it once again. You have two very polarizing political views in the US and the world. They are so very different that one or both views are wrong, yet that one view has a very large following. One or more sides have successfully pulled off some major propoganda. The bottom line, though, is that the successful creation of a populist view does not mean that view is correct. The danger is that it gives the strong appearance of being correct that is difficult to disprove.

Monday, May 08, 2006

UN Peacekeepers Continue Sexual Exploitation in Liberia

FoxNews reports of some of the 17,000 UN peacekeepers in the poverty stricken country of Liberia are exploiting young girls by trading food, money and other items for sex. According to the Fox report:

Save the Children, which surveyed nearly 160 children and about 170 adults who were either living in camps or had recently returned home, said they were repeatedly told of girls having sex with older men in exchange for money, food and other goods.

The accused included peacekeeping troops, aid workers and other powerful men in the community. The report did not give the nationality of the aid workers or peacekeepers involved. About 17,000 U.N. peacekeepers are based in Liberia.

The story explains why it is so easy to exploit the young girls:

"With the coming in of a new government, mechanisms are being put in place to limit these kinds of things," said Mohammed Sheriff, Liberia's deputy health minister.

But Sheriff cautioned that preventing sex transactions is a difficult task for a poor country still recovering from years of violence.

"We have parents that have so many children — eight to 10 — that are not able to cope with the meager amount of money they have," he said. "People live below 25 cents (per day); so you can look at reasons why these thing may happen."

Yes, it is easy to see why the exploitation can be accomplished. What is tough to swallow is that this comes at the hands of the vaunted United Nations. It also has been brought to the world's attention several times and yet it continues with "little change" and little world outrage. Those who look to the UN to lead the world, should see that they cannot even patrol themselves. When it comes to doing the right thing, the UN shows itself to be impotent. But when it comes to exploiting young starving girls impotence is far from the problem.

Take a look at the Gas Buddy Map

If you click on this link that I have listed before, you will see a colorized map with all of the US gas prices. When I last posted the link, everything was either red or yellow except for the states around Utah. Now we have a lot more green, even if most is still light green. However, there is one conspicuous RED blotch in the shape of California. Does this say anything? California is full of liberals who want high gas prices for the sake of the environment. Well, they have it while the rest of the country is going down. It's a win, win, right?

I wonder if the coyote's running illegals across the border have had to start adding a fuel surcharge to their fees?

Sunday, May 07, 2006

Think tank: Amnesty International Squandered Reputation

CNSNews is reporting on Amnesty International's focus on the US and Israel while ignoring the horrible human right record of China. According to CNSNews:
The human rights group Amnesty International has "squandered its reputation," according to a new think tank report, by focusing on the alleged misdeeds of Israel and the United States while practically ignoring rights violations by China, North Korea and other notorious regimes.

"Amnesty International has moved its focus away from human rights as traditionally understood and toward human rights as Leftist ideology," stated Alex Svetlicinii of Capital Research Center (CRC), which conducted the study.

Amnesty has certainly been consumed with its hatred and bias against the Bush Administration that they have lost their mission compass that defines what they are all about. The elitist mentality around the world is so out of focus that they point to the mole hills of the US while ignoring the mountains of China, North Korea, Sudan, Venezuela, Cuba and many other places.

This lop-sided focus becomes obvious when you compare the scoring methods that describe Amnesty's research into various countries. The scrutiny score evaluates how much focus Amnesty places in researching human rights abuses for each country. CNSNews describes how incredibly out of kilter Amnesty is in their evaluations:
Svetlicinii looked at the human rights reports issued by Amnesty International as well as the separate scores that another human rights group -- Freedom House - assigned to countries for civil liberties and political rights. Svetlicinii then determined the "scrutiny score" for each country.

According to CRC's findings, Amnesty International applied the heaviest scrutiny to Israel (its scrutiny score was 255) followed by the United States (a score of 128). At the bottom of the list were the communist-run nations of Vietnam (a score of three), North Korea (a score of two) and China (a score of one).
David Hogberg of the CRC (think tank) points to a theory by the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan concerning complaints of human rights abuses versus actual human rights abuses:
"The greater the number of complaints being aired, the better protected are human rights in that country," Hogberg said, paraphrasing Moynihan.

It is a lot easier for Amnesty International to criticize places that are relatively free, like Israel, the United Kingdom or the United States, because there is really no penalty for doing so," Hogberg added.
After all, in a truly abusive regime how much tolerance can be expected for those complaining of abuse. Probably zero. The abuse is dished out with a very real threat of loss of life for them or their loved ones if they speak of it. In the US, how much fear is there of complaints of human rights abuse? There is barely any disincentive to make false claims of abuse. The logic of Moynihan's law is flawless, and it points to a misguided and worthless organization that has an opportunity to make a real difference in the world. Instead Amnesty chooses political ideology. Let those thousands suffering at the hands of real abusive regimes rot. The political agenda is all that matters to them.

Saturday, May 06, 2006

Howard Dean leads the charge against vote fraud prevention

Howard Dean and the Democratic National Committee will appeal a recent Indiana law aimed at voter fraud prevention. According to Newsmax:
National and state Democrats are planning to appeal a federal court ruling upholding Indiana's new law requiring a photo ID to vote.
Democrats have time and again displayed fear and resistence to any law that would be effective in preventing voter fraud. What better method of fraud prevention than to require voters to show a state issued photo ID card. Along with fraud prevention, penalties for making fake state issued ID's would be a good deterrent.

Dems try to claim that purchasing the cards would cause a hardship on the poor and prevent them from having their vote. Never, never, never do they ever state that it is a good idea and for the sake of the poor we should provide the IDs free for those who can't afford it. This underscores the fact that they know there is significant fraud on the part of Democrat voters. They have no concern for the poor here, they just want to ensure the fraud continues in their favor.

Logic Lifeline 1 Year

Last May I began the Logic Lifeline. If my goal was to change the world, I haven't made a dent in it yet. No, my goal was to have an outlet to give my opinions to more than my family (who were probably getting tired of hearing it even if they do agree with me). I have enjoyed the experience so far for the most part. There has been good and bad. The good is making a few friends on both sides, expanding my horizons to think beyond the box I am in, to have some good posts appreciated with good comments, free grammar/spelling lessons and that feeling you get when have a good debate going. The bad is having fewer readers than hoped, not having the time to post all you want, being wrong a few times and having to apologize and persevering when the comments dry up.

Thanks to all who have read and/or commented this last year; whether I am on your daily, weekly, monthly or once in awhile reading list I appreciate your time. I hope this next year to build on the base I have begun and continue posting.


Friday, May 05, 2006

Oil Profits and a Little Perspective - 3

Here are the final pictures I will be posting on this. I have about 6 more, but from these you can get the idea of the immense wealth going to these countries.

Oil Profits and a Little Perspective - 2

A couple more pictures showing the real oil profits.

Oil Profits and a Little Perspective - 1

Recently the media focused on profits from oil companies and the retirement package for the CEO of Exxon. I have pointed to where the real oil profits are taking place: the OPEC countries. Some time back I was emailed some pictures of the house of the family of Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, the former president of the United Arab Emirates. In the next few posts I will be posting some of those pictures. This forum may not allow enough clarity on the pictures to get the full effect, but they will give a good idea of the wealth involved.

How will the media treat one of their own?

We have seen how the media and a list of celebrities have treated Rush Limbaugh over his addiction to pain medication. Now one of the liberals own, Patrick Kennedy, has admitted being addicted to pain medicine and has checked himself into rehab after a car crash. While there are still outstanding questions of whether Kennedy was drinking in addition to pain medication and how the police failed to administer a breathalyzer test on the scene, the admission of Kennedy is now fact.

Rush Limbaugh has been subjected to much derision as liberals who hate him have made him the butt of many jokes for his habit. Make no mistake, Limbaugh opened himself to this criticism when his addiction became public knowledge. We were disappointed that he had allowed this to happen, but he took full responsibility of his addiction. While it was pictured as his fan base overlooking his shortcoming, to be more accurate there was an admission that he failed and a subsequent forgiveness of this failure. There is a difference.

If the details released are the extent of the crash incident, Kennedy appears to be taking responsibility for his addiction. From all appearances he is doing the right thing. My prediction is that while there may be some mild criticism and joking (mostly because of his father's notoriety), it will be nothing compared to Limbaugh's media drubbing. Kennedy will be embraced with the compassion and forgiveness that Limbaugh was denied, except from his fan base.

In the end it is not about the failure of men. Men will fail us even as we fail ourselves and others. It may not be addictions or moral failures. It may not make headlines, but we all fall short. When this happens leaders should not deny, drag their feet, and cover up. They should do the responsible thing. People are amazingly forgiving. Unless, of course, they disagree with you politically. Then all too often all bets are off.

Liberals are the biggest defenders and biggest offenders when it comes to censorship

The hypocrisy of liberals can be quite choking at times. Liberals make a huge deal out of censorship whenever one of their pet causes are threatened. However, when it comes to free speech that steps on their toes they often use silence as a weapon against it.

The woman that protested against China's President Hu on his visit to the US is claiming that CNN pre-censored her comments in an interview. The whole foundation of her protest was about China's barbaric treatment of the Falon Gong by killing them and harvesting their organs. Newsmax reports:

Though Wang's one-woman protest received widespread media attention, the press largely over looked the reason for her outcry - a bid to call attention to the gruesome organ harvesting practice.

Dr. Wang told Farber that the Beijing regime extracts hearts, livers and kidneys from prisoners all over China; including "prisoners of conscience," who could be Christians, anti-communists, or members of the Falun Gong religious movement.

So having been scheduled to be interviewed by Wolf Blitzer on CNN, the protestor Dr. Wenyi Wang, was told moments before the show not to mention the organ harvesting because it was during viewer's dinner hour. In an interview with talk show host Barry Farber:
She told Farber, however, that before the show "one producer actually told me - there will be no discussion about the organs."
I am sure that if there was a story about George Bush ordering the harvesting of organs of prisoners, CNN would have no problem airing discussion of it during the breakfast, lunch and dinner hours. What is the liberal's fascination and enthrallment to China? Look at how Dr. Wang's protest was covered in the mainstream media. When Bush is abroad and being protested by thousands the media has no problem with it; even relishing it. They hardly blinked when the dud grenade was lobbed on the stage with Bush. Actually, they could hardly contain their disappointment it did not go off. Yet China's Hu gets protested by one person and they both portray her as a nut and ignore the actual reason she is protesting.

I have stated before that silence is the weapon of choice by the media. If they disagree with it and they can get away with maintaining silence, they will do it. This voluntary censorship is called bias.

Give California Back

In one of my comments I joked about giving California back to Mexico. Since then I have been thinking maybe it is not such a bad idea. California represents 54 of the electoral votes needed to win the presidency. These 54 votes have gone to the Democrat since Reagan and gives them quite a jumpstart each election. Take away that headache along with 2 Dem Senators and a bunch of Dem Congressman and the country lurches to the right in one shot. We would probably lose 1/3 of the anti-American critics as well as some radical left leaning schools like Berkely. The icing on the cake is that we would lose Hollywood. Mexico would benefit from the economic boost which could take some of the incentive out of illegal immigration. California would still be a great place to visit. All of the benefits and none of the headache. Ok, I am still joking but it is fun to think about.

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

Republica del Norte?

While most illegals coming to the US is about economics and partaking in the American Dream (sometimes without wanting the American part as the "Day by Day comic strip yesterday points out), the recent protests are founded in something much more sinister. We have all heard of the groups involved like La Raca (the Race), International ANSWER ( a communist based organization that also whips up anti-war protesters), Che (another Latino supremecist group). We have all heard of the "reconquista" movement which is all about taking back land acquired from Mexico.

Now there is a Professor in the University of Mexico, Charles Truxillo, who is calling for a new Mexican Homeland in the United States. According to the Conservative Voice that I have linked to:
Truxillo says this should be accomplished “by any means necessary”.
What is the scope of his suggestion? The entire Southwest Region:
Truxillo, who advocates an Hispanic separatist movement, said that this new Mexican state should include California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and southern Colorado, as well as Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo León and Tamaulipas. He also suggests the name for the new fatherland be “Republica del Norte”.
The thing that leaps out at me is that he seems to be modeling his approach in the template of the Israel / Palestine conflict. He uses similar phrasing to describe the relationship:
The Associated Press reports that UNM Professor and Director of UNM's Southwest Hispanic
Research Institute Felipe Gonzáles said that there is a “certain homeland undercurrent” amongst Hispanics who continue to believe that their lands were stolen by the US. Truxillo continued by saying “We [Hispanics] remain subordinated” and “the long history of oppression and subordination has to end.”
Let's see: stolen land, oppression, subordination, homeland. The only ingredient left is to throw in the word "occupation". I'm sure that will come. The bottom line is that all of those people criticizing the US for simply wanting to enforce their immigration laws need to take an honest look at what is really happening here. This is currently at the "seed" stage, but it will grow. There are already predictions that in a decade or so the US will either have to give up much or all of the Southwest region or annex Mexico. While most people have a heart for the poor people just wanting to better their life, we cannot just look at today. The seeds being planted today, are growing and we will need to deal with them now as seeds or later as huge thriving plants.